- sell a new game on cd/dvd with windows executable- wait a few months, put up a linux client on some really hard to find ftp site- wait a bit longer and add that client to the cd/dvd- wonder wth you did wrong and why linux is not helping to pay the bills

InBlack wrote on Aug 6, 2012, 05:53:[...]Im not sure there is a way back, it simply costs too much money and resources to develop a game that supports both OpenGL AND DirectX. Its quite obvious where most developers will turn to, since currently the market share of Linux is negligible. [...]

People keep saying that but is it actually true? I'd really love to hear some numbers on that one, I've never even seen approximations.From what I understand the problem is not just OpenGL versus DirectX (actually it should be Direct3D because afaik DirectX is also responsible for sound and what not while OpenGL is just an api for video) but also things like sound systems (which is still a bit of a problem because there are so many flavours like OSS, Alsa, pulseaudio etc.) and other technical stuff.

Panickd wrote on Aug 5, 2012, 22:15:[...]And I stand by the zealot statement: install what you want on your machine and stick entirely to open source if that's what gets you off but I don't need to hear about how I shouldn't be installing the Nvidia drivers on my machine because they aren't open. There is far too much of that crap in the Linux world and all it does is scare off people who were just looking for a new OS, not a new religion.[...]

*shrug* I don't know, every time I went to a forum because I had issues with video card drivers I was never told to just install the open source ones.The NVidia drivers are good, people know that. Yes, they are not open source but not everyone is like Stallmann. Of course a bit more transparency on the side of NVidia would be appreciated but as long as it works well enough I don't see the problem.Maybe I've just never met these people (these zealots) or maybe I unintentionally avoided them.

DangerDog wrote on Aug 5, 2012, 16:13:You would need some killer game to be exclusive to Linux before it would spark enough interest to maybe making the switch.

"Valve announced today that Half-Life 3 will be exclusive to their new Linux gaming platform"

I would ROFLMAO until I passed out.

Unfortunately Microsoft made sure that their OS remains the 600lbs gorilla in the room. They effectively "corraled" the market with DirectX 9 and onwards, which was a brilliant but ruthless strategy. OpenGL never stood a chance vs Microsoft $$$.

Im not sure there is a way back, it simply costs too much money and resources to develop a game that supports both OpenGL AND DirectX. Its quite obvious where most developers will turn to, since currently the market share of Linux is negligible.

Valve, Blizzard, iD and a few other big name developers will continue to support OpenGL (and hence their games should be able to run natively in Linux) but for the most part that is due to the market share of Mac gamers, which continues to grow. Linux has nothing to do with it...

I think one of Red Hat's creators said that he doesn't want Steam on Linux because it isn't open-source. While I respect the strength of his convictions, it's kind of stupid to turn away from the main reason why Linux lacks mainstream appeal: gaming (or lack thereof). If Linux supported the same number of games as Windows, I think a lot of people would switch over in a heartbeat.

The zealots do more to kill Linux adoption among the mainstream than anything else. It gets tiring having to tell them "I don't give a fuck I just want something that works" while they are trying to preach at you while simultaneously solving your issue in the most condescending way possible. The whole Linux ecosystem would be much healthier without all the "bible thumper"-like mentality.

Uh-huh. And how did you come to that conclusion? Maybe there are studies that were made that you'd like to share or otherwise reputable sources that prove that indeed all or most people who use Linux would never want to pay for software and are also all the other stuff that you try to label them as.Linux "just works" as much as Windows does. Hell, I've actually had more issues with Windows 7 than with Debian because that thing is so bloody cumbersome to use. But that is anecdotal evidence and therefore not worth much.From what I have seen the current Ubuntu is gaudy enough and "just works".

Much as I'd love to argue semantics with you I think the fact that Redhat had to turn it's desktop version into a community based project and focus on the server market before they could make any real money says it all. Look at all the other distros that never took that path that aren't around today.

Linux is insanely reliable and easy to get up and running right up until it isn't at which point it becomes aggravating and mystifying because if only that "one thing" would work properly it would be perfect. There are a lot of those "one thing" issues out there, especially in the hardware realm.

And I stand by the zealot statement: install what you want on your machine and stick entirely to open source if that's what gets you off but I don't need to hear about how I shouldn't be installing the Nvidia drivers on my machine because they aren't open. There is far too much of that crap in the Linux world and all it does is scare off people who were just looking for a new OS, not a new religion.

And for the record, I am an OS agnostic. I use Windows (by necessity), MacOS and Linux on an almost daily basis.

Jivaro wrote on Aug 5, 2012, 19:33:[...]What is the Linux world like 10 years from now if the corporate world starts controlling it's development direction? I mean, gaming is a business...and I am not so naive as to even begin to claim otherwise...but there is small business and then there is the corporate world, and the decisions they each make with regards to their customers and their products are very very different.

Not that any of that is completely on topic..just kind of thinking out loud.

Well, if I may divert your attention to this graphic you can see that a lot of the contributions to the kernel is made by paid developers (something similar can be seen here).If I am not mistaken, though, the kernel is just how the system communicates with the hardware so the only danger would be in unoptimised code.On the other hand there are a lot of flavours when it comes to Linux so it's not really possible for corporations to "take over Linux", except of course if they would pay them to write a lot of software for that but that would not stop unpaid developers or hobbyists to still release software under the GPL.

So basically there are already corporations involved with Linux, like RedHat, but from what I can see they are doing fine.

Or maybe I misunderstood your point.

No, you understood it. I was simply speaking in generalizations and there are always going to be flaws with that. I will use a specific example of my thinking...(it too could be flawed but wth right?)

ex: Activision, EA, Ubisoft and their ilk decide to start pushing developers toward Linux releases. As part of that decision, they pick a particular Linux. For this example, let's say Ubuntu. At first, no big deal. In fact, it seems like a good idea. But over a few years of time...these developers, along with various hardware manufacturers, start encouraging or even forcing Ubuntu to make changes that are "good" for gaming. "Good" being defined as good for those companies...unfortunately I am not savvy enough to think of an example so folks will have to use their imagination. Point is that gamers that want to use something other then Ubuntu can't, or if they do they are doing so at their own risk and can not get tech support or warranty service.

This is just something that popped in my head. Maybe I am just being tin-foil headed about it, or maybe it isn't even really possible. *shrug*

Nope all Linux needs to do is give people who play Counter Strike a few more FPS and that's it. Oh yeah it does that in L4D2. So when you get a better FPS in Couter Strike Global and then DOTA2 plays better then the eSports people start using it that will be the start. Then there are the Steam Hardware that runs Linux and bing that is it.

Personally I don't want Linux to be main stream I like my nitch product that I can do whatever with fine and don't want it to get attention from eyes.

Jivaro wrote on Aug 5, 2012, 19:33:[...]What is the Linux world like 10 years from now if the corporate world starts controlling it's development direction? I mean, gaming is a business...and I am not so naive as to even begin to claim otherwise...but there is small business and then there is the corporate world, and the decisions they each make with regards to their customers and their products are very very different.

Not that any of that is completely on topic..just kind of thinking out loud.

Well, if I may divert your attention to this graphic you can see that a lot of the contributions to the kernel is made by paid developers (something similar can be seen here).If I am not mistaken, though, the kernel is just how the system communicates with the hardware so the only danger would be in unoptimised code.On the other hand there are a lot of flavours when it comes to Linux so it's not really possible for corporations to "take over Linux", except of course if they would pay them to write a lot of software for that but that would not stop unpaid developers or hobbyists to still release software under the GPL.

So basically there are already corporations involved with Linux, like RedHat, but from what I can see they are doing fine.

Totally uniformed and inexperienced with regards to Linux, as I only recently started messing with it so as to self-teach myself on it's use...so take the following with a huge grain of salt...

If I was a Linux user/gamer....I am not sure how I would feel about the concept of Linux becoming a domain of the mainstream. The mainstream taking up gaming as a hobby has not really been something I have looked at fondly. The mainstream brings "big money" and "big money" brings a bunch of suits, publicly owned companies, and the next thing you know...the games are made by people who don't know or care about the product itself...only if it makes them a profit.

What is the Linux world like 10 years from now if the corporate world starts controlling it's development direction? I mean, gaming is a business...and I am not so naive as to even begin to claim otherwise...but there is small business and then there is the corporate world, and the decisions they each make with regards to their customers and their products are very very different.

Not that any of that is completely on topic..just kind of thinking out loud.

The zealots do more to kill Linux adoption among the mainstream than anything else. It gets tiring having to tell them "I don't give a fuck I just want something that works" while they are trying to preach at you while simultaneously solving your issue in the most condescending way possible. The whole Linux ecosystem would be much healthier without all the "bible thumper"-like mentality.

Uh-huh. And how did you come to that conclusion? Maybe there are studies that were made that you'd like to share or otherwise reputable sources that prove that indeed all or most people who use Linux would never want to pay for software and are also all the other stuff that you try to label them as.Linux "just works" as much as Windows does. Hell, I've actually had more issues with Windows 7 than with Debian because that thing is so bloody cumbersome to use. But that is anecdotal evidence and therefore not worth much.From what I have seen the current Ubuntu is gaudy enough and "just works".

It's really bizarre reading the irrational hatred of being offered a choice. What does it hurt you guys if Linux is an option? Personally I'd love to get away from MS.

As to Carmack: They haven't shipped a good game since Quake 3, and in those days their idea of supporting Linux was to release the game for windows, put a Linux binary on their FTP, and then wait a few months before putting out retail copies of the Linux version. Was he really surprised that no one waited that long, and just bought the Win version and used the binaries from the FTP?

Kitkoan wrote on Aug 5, 2012, 17:55:Now with this in mind, who do you think I'm going to listen to more about the current computer gaming market? Someone still relevant and making well received PC games in todays market who has also been able to view the long term gaming market with things like the Steam store? Or of the someone who hasn't been real relevant to the gaming market in the past 10 years and their best attempt to seem modern gave forth to "MegaTextures"?&#65279;

Just because Carmack is a has been doesnt mean everything he says is automatically untrue.

"I want to be spoonfed what I should think by someone I respect!!" Really? Thats pathetic. But then again, it is quite common.

Linux isnt even close to being a widespread gaming platform any time soon. I learned that through experience and observation.

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

- Ben Franklin

Theres some spoonfeeding for ya, big guy. Open wide, here comes the train.

Kitkoan wrote on Aug 5, 2012, 17:55:Now with this in mind, who do you think I'm going to listen to more about the current computer gaming market? Someone still relevant and making well received PC games in todays market who has also been able to view the long term gaming market with things like the Steam store? Or of the someone who hasn't been real relevant to the gaming market in the past 10 years and their best attempt to seem modern gave forth to "MegaTextures"?&#65279;

Just because Carmack is a has been doesnt mean everything he says is automatically untrue.

"I want to be spoonfed what I should think by someone I respect!!" Really? Thats pathetic. But then again, it is quite common.

Linux isnt even close to being a widespread gaming platform any time soon. I learned that through experience and observation.

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

- Ben Franklin

Theres some spoonfeeding for ya, big guy. Open wide, here comes the train.

yuastnav wrote on Aug 5, 2012, 16:23:In other words "Those mean Linux peoplez are not giving me their money. QQ"

More like "Linux peoplez don't buy software that isn't free-as-in-beer."

The zealots do more to kill Linux adoption among the mainstream than anything else. It gets tiring having to tell them "I don't give a fuck I just want something that works" while they are trying to preach at you while simultaneously solving your issue in the most condescending way possible. The whole Linux ecosystem would be much healthier without all the "bible thumper"-like mentality.

So, when was the last time John Carmack released a well received PC game? Over 10 years ago? Doom 3 was a disappointment, Quake Wars: Enemy Territories wasn't any better, Rage? Yeah...

And when was the last time Gabe Newell released a well received PC game who says that Linux is a very good step in the right direction? Portal 2, Portal 1, L4D2, Half-life Episodes (I know 3 is still wanted...)

Now with this in mind, who do you think I'm going to listen to more about the current computer gaming market? Someone still relevant and making well received PC games in todays market who has also been able to view the long term gaming market with things like the Steam store? Or of the someone who hasn't been real relevant to the gaming market in the past 10 years and their best attempt to seem modern gave forth to "MegaTextures"?&#65279;